Grant: Michael Young slumping, but why mess with AL success?

1/30

TONY GUTIERREZ / AP

THE BEST OF THE RANGERS' MICHAEL YOUNG: Texas Rangers' Derek Holland, right, dumps champagne on Michael Young in the clubhouse after the Rangers advanced to the World Series with a 6-2 win over thevNew York Yankees in Game 6 of baseball's American League Championship Series Friday, Oct. 22, 2010, in Arlington, Texas.

Comment From Bennie... There has been a lot of speculation and conjecture by the local media the last few weeks that if Ron Washington were to make Michael Young a part time player that he would lose the clubhouse and the team would win less games than they would if he kept running Young out there everyday. Is there any evidence whatsoever that that would happen? Do you know of any examples where a baseball club that has been in first place all year long and had close to the best record in baseball all year long benched a clubhouse leader after 4-5 months of very low production both defensively and offensively where the benching had a negative effect on the win total afterwards?

Evan Grant: And so it begins. ... The Rangers are winning, have the best record in the AL, have the biggest lead over a second place in the league and that's with Young not playing at his top level. The manager believes in Michael Young and he's got a track record to back it up with. In addition, Young is the clubhouse leader. All of that is well-documented. With Young struggling, the Rangers have won six of every 10 games this year, which is an astounding rate regardless of how well an individual player may be playing. To sit him and put Profar or Olt in on a more regular basis is to suggest that these players would "carry" the team to at least one more win every 10 games. That is exactly the kind of pressure you don't need to put on a young player. Now, as to your rather biased question, here's the simple answer, Bennie: There is no guarantee that the Rangers would lose more games if they sat Young, but there is no guarantee they wouldn't. Why would you mess with the MOST SUCCESSFUL TEAM in the AL right now. To expect more of this team is unrealistic.

Comment From Anne... Murphy has really tuned up his performance. Doing it to be kept, or making his trade value higher?

Evan Grant: I think Murphy has played his way into the Rangers' plans for 2013. If he was still a part-time player, his production might not equal his likely raise. He's a full-time player now, putting together excellent full-time numbers. I think it's more likely the Rangers consider dealing Nelson Cruz than Murphy, but both will be one year away from free agency.

Comment From Rick... Do I understand the roster rules correctly? By having a player on the 25-man roster on the DL and unavailable for the playoffs, like the minor league pitcher temporarily promoted, the Rangers can add a September call-up player, like Profar, to the playoff roster?

Evan Grant: Here is all you need to know about the playoff roster situation as it is has evolved: As long as the player is in the ORGANIZATION by Sept. 1, he can be made eligible for the playoff roster. It's that simple. There are all kinds of loopholes teams use to get players in the system (but not on the 40-man roster as of Sept. 1) on the playoff roster. Profar is eligible.

To post a comment, log into your chosen social network and then add your comment below. Your comments are subject to our Terms of Service and the privacy policy and terms of service of your social network. If you do not want to comment with a social network, please consider writing a letter to the editor.